A soldier gunning down the officer who reprimanded him for using a cell-phone on the frontline, jawans airing their grievances on social media and the Army reporting about 100 stress-related deaths a year, all point in an ominous direction. Indiscipline ~ of which suicide/fratricide are extreme examples ~ can often be traced to a failure of leadership, which includes man management as much as providing the gung-ho on the battlefield.

Sadly, it must be asked if the officers of today are adequately equipped to get the best from their men.

A modern Army boasts not only the most advanced technology in terms of weapons and equipment, but personnel powerfully motivated to perform their onerous tasks.

It has long been lamented that “quality” youth do not accord high priority to a military career, so there is scope for apprehension over the “standard” of leadership: a standard that in prevailing circumstances calls for a lot more than spit-and-polish on parade.

For though the majority of soldiers still hail from rustic stock, the young men have enhanced aspirations that may not be addressed in the “colonial” ethos of a tradition-rich service. In the unfortunate incident under focus, the officer belonged to the Armoured Corps, the current shortage of officers had him “seconded” to a Rashtriya Rifles unit of men from the Madras Regiment.

The professional gap may have been bridged, but the “emotional” bonding may not have been as strong as desirable. The soldier could well have been using his cell-phone to talk with family or friend and resented the call being interrupted.

There is need for counselling in such matters, the scanty reports available point to the cell-phone being damaged ~ was it snatched from him?

Jawans, including those in the paramilitary, accord high priority to maintaining contact with “home” and officers must learn to deal with that.

Remember that when defence minister George Fernandes “pulled strings” for a satellite-phone service to be provided at the Siachen Base Camp, the soldiers were happy to pay the high tariff involved.

This is only one example of “aspirational” changes that officers now have to factor in, the earlier “gap” between officers and men has been narrowed. Soldiers, particularly those deployed on internal security duties, have to be enlightened on the objectives of their task: the days of “theirs not to question why” ended long ago.

Understanding the complexities of the job might help avert “confrontation” with civil rights issues: as raised by the apex court in relation to killings in Manipur, and by the High Court in respect of J-K.

A sensitive defence minister is urgently required, the Army has to “grow up” beyond the stage of formally commending the use of a civilian as a human shield.

That arrogant “monster” can turn inwards too.